slovakguy said:
granted, the lab screwed up on their protocols.
granted, this is not the first time the lab screwed up.
but am i mistaken in this? didn't his other samples show traces of the same exogenous testosterone when put under irms testing?
yes... this is what i'm saying. they do a sort of pre-screening and test the urine for an out of wack testosterone to epi-testosterone ratio... if that is out of wack then they do a blood test - irms so basically there is no doubt that this out of wack T : epi-T can be a natural phenomena... this T came from outside Landis' body.
only one of Landis' samples (after stage 17) had out of wack T : epi-T (but this test had all kinds of errors in terms of following proceedures etc) this triggered an irms which confirmed unequivocally that yes he did have exogenous T in his system. after this they went back and tested some of his other samples with the irms test and even though those samples had ok T : epi-T, when they did the irms on them they showed exogenous T.
so basically Landis was doing T all the way throught the tour... this is comfirmed by the irms test... but the test that triggered the whole string of events (the T : epi-T test after stage 17) was frought with errors so... so some scenareos might be:
a) the T : epi-T test was actually f'd up, but it triggered the irms which showed exogenous T anyway
b) the test was good and Landis f'd up and just did something different after stage 17 that changed his T : epi-T... e.g. took a tainted blood transfusion from before the tour that didn't have the
super special formula T that he was using during the tour
c) for the consparisy theorists - the lab knew that Landis had cheated and fuged the T : epi-T test in order to trigger the irms test.. which then showed that yes he was using synthetic T
then there is d), e), f), g)... take your pick... but bottom line Landis was doing T... there was nothing wrong with the irms tests... but Landis and his team don't want to talk about the irms tests... they want to talk about everything else... the efficacy of the T, the errors in the urine test, they want to talk about the
chain of command, present pictures of the lab not taken at a time when the test was conducted... etc, etc... anything but the only thing that matters in this case... the irms test. the irms tests stand on their own and prove that he was using T... this is what the panel ruled, that inspite errors in the urine test there was no such errors in the irms so he was doing T.